NATO Carrying out Vast Syria Disinformation Campaign

NATO Carrying out Vast Syria Disinformation Campaign

For those still skeptical about the West, Israel, and the Gulf State’s willingness to subvert and destroy nations throughout the Middle East
solely for self-serving purposes, using any guise or lie necessary to accomplish their goals – readers are encouraged to revisit this 2003 Guardian
article titled, “Macmillan backed Syria assassination plot,” where a fully detailed agenda of destabilizing and pitting nations against each other
was fully formulated. In fact, many of the dynamics at play then, in 1956, can still be seen at work and being openly manipulated by Western powers
today.

Yep it appears like TPTB are trying everything they can to start a war with Syria including spreading misinformation to the best of there ability And
i am sure this wont come as a shock to most of you following the story I am sure that there will be an invasion soon Its a shame that many good men
are going to die in this invasion

What I'm seeing in the article is many references to a writer in 2007, the fact that the West is trying to persuade Russia and China to go along with
sanctions at the UN, and the US has plans to attack various sites. (I would think the military has plans to attack just about any spot in the world.
I suspect all large militaries do.)

What I'm missing in this article (which I admit, I didn't read all the way to the bottom) is any evidence that "Nato is
Carrying out Vast Syria Disinformation Campaign." It must be in there somewhere, could you point me to it?

I'm not saying NATO is or isn't, I don't know. But it seems like the headline is sure, please tell me why they're so sure.

I'd like to think I'm not a truth-hater, but who knows? I just haven't found the evidence for this particular charge yet. I went to the article
and the thread. I must be blind, I didn't see it. It may not be worth your trouble, but if you can show me a little more specifically where the
evidence is, I'd be grateful.

They are going to try to overturn the Syrian Assad regime without question. The high level defections, as occurred in Libya, plus the recent
assassinations of leading figures in the Assad government are evidence of the role bribery is playing in the overall process of regime
change.

Hypothetically speaking, if one were to suppose that an ally of NATO, like Russia for example, were interested in thwarting regime change in
Syria, one approach would be to open up the bank vaults and "meet or match" any bribes offered by NATO in the situation. This might be more important
than trying to sneak helicopter gunships into Syria.

Russia was caught flat footed on Libya. With Putin in charge now, maybe they will pick up the pace on reinstating rationality as an operative
mechanism in world affairs.

On the whole I'm disappointed with the various forces opposing American hegemony. They seem sluggish and uninformed. The Russian ambassador to the UN,
Chyerkin (Sp?), is a very intelligent guy, but his statements although encouraging to people who want balance, and actually shrewdly amusing, lack
something.

I'm on the computer at work so I'm kinda winging it here, without access to all my bookmarks and saved webpages, but . . .

The subject of opposition to American hegemony in the Middle East and indeed throughout the world, is an intriguing one. I really can't figure
out these middle eastern leaders.

When I was posting more often in the 9/11 forum I came across a website run by a middle eastern 9/11 truther. What amazed me was his own amazement and
consternation at not being able to get any traction whatever, in his own bailiwick, on the subject of 9/11 truth. Even among America's detractors
abroad, nobody seemed willing to use the 9/11 cudgel on the Great Satan.

It was almost comical. This guy was as frustrated as a truther from Philadelphia might be. I couldn't believe it.

An Egyptian army general under Mubarak made some tentative statements in support of 9/11 truth and Ahmadinejad, Iran's President, has made some
mischievous allusions to 9/11 truth, as has Hugo Chavez, but nobody has really seen the utility of taking the trouble to call a spade a spade on 9/11
and to study the issue and make a cogent, responsible statement indicting the American government for an attack on its own people.

This state of affairs baffles me completely. I am at a loss to explain it. I think these people are all dreaming of the day when America finally sees
things their way and they are having cucumber sandwiches in the White House garden with Barack and Michelle and chuckling over what an amazing series
of follies American foreign policy used to be.

Most civilized people, upon being attacked by a wild animal, would be terribly afraid and in shock. Time would lengthen out as the mind races to
comprehend the situation of a savage onslaught. Most people are killed or maimed and left for dead in those few shocking moments. A few realize, late
in the process, most often too late in the process, that they must suddenly fight like savages to survive.

When are Chavez, Assad and others going to wake up and fight? They have seen Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi torn apart. When are they going to get
smart and fight like savages against the new Nazism?

When are they going to pull out the most savage weapon of all, . . . the intellect? They already have anti-Nazis in the US and elsewhere using that
weapon as if their lives depended on it. All of our lives do depend on it.

Wake up world, before it is too late. Now is the time to fight like savages against these monsters. We are in the eye of the hurricane in Europe and
the Americas. 9/11 was the leading edge of that hurricane. Around the world countries are being destroyed. The back end of the hurricane will
eventually come in the form of the big clampdown that has been in preparation for years.

Let's go back to 1936 and look at the example of a real man, a real leader, not one of today's "insane clown posse" of leadership frauds:

Mussolini, upon invading Ethiopia, had promptly declared his own "Italian Empire"; because the League of Nations afforded Haile Selassie the
opportunity to address the assembly, Italy even withdrew its League delegation, on 12 May 1936.[72] It was in this context that Haile Selassie walked
into the hall of the League of Nations, introduced by the President of the Assembly as "His Imperial Majesty, the Emperor of Ethiopia" (Sa Majesté
Imperiale, l'Empereur d'Ethiopie). The introduction caused a great many Italian journalists in the galleries to erupt into jeering, heckling, and
whistling. As it turned out, they had earlier been issued whistles by Mussolini's son-in-law, Count Galeazzo Ciano.[73] Haile Selassie waited calmly
for the hall to be cleared, and responded "majestically"[74] with a speech sometimes considered among the most stirring of the 20th century.[5]

Although fluent in French, the working language of the League, Haile Selassie chose to deliver his historic speech in his native Amharic. He asserted
that, because his "confidence in the League was absolute", his people were now being slaughtered. He pointed out that the same European states that
found in Ethiopia's favor at the League of Nations were refusing Ethiopia credit and matériel while aiding Italy, which was employing chemical
weapons on military and civilian targets alike.

"It was at the time when the operations for the encircling of Makale were taking place that the Italian command, fearing a rout, followed the
procedure which it is now my duty to denounce to the world. Special sprayers were installed on board aircraft so that they could vaporize, over vast
areas of territory, a fine, death-dealing rain. Groups of nine, fifteen, eighteen aircraft followed one another so that the fog issuing from them
formed a continuous sheet. It was thus that, as from the end of January 1936, soldiers, women, children, cattle, rivers, lakes, and pastures were
drenched continually with this deadly rain. In order to kill off systematically all living creatures, in order to more surely poison waters and
pastures, the Italian command made its aircraft pass over and over again. That was its chief method of warfare.[75]"

Noting that his own "small people of 12 million inhabitants, without arms, without resources" could never withstand an attack by a large power such as
Italy, with its 42 million people and "unlimited quantities of the most death-dealing weapons", he contended that all small states were threatened by
the aggression, and that all small states were in effect reduced to vassal states in the absence of collective action. He admonished the League that
"God and history will remember your judgment."[76]

"It is collective security: it is the very existence of the League of Nations. It is the confidence that each State is to place in international
treaties... In a word, it is international morality that is at stake. Have the signatures appended to a Treaty value only in so far as the signatory
Powers have a personal, direct and immediate interest involved?"

The speech made the emperor an icon for anti-fascists around the world, and Time named him "Man of the Year".[77] He failed, however, to get what he
most needed: the League agreed to only partial and ineffective sanctions on Italy, and several members even recognized the Italian conquest.[62]
[edit]

I think a case could be made that UN sanctions against Iraq. instituted in 1990 after the invasion of Kuwait were in fact a form of undeclared
asymmetrical warfare against that country prosecuted by the United States and disguised as a UN initiative.

A United Nations survey of civilian damage caused by the allied bombardment of Iraq calls the results "near apocalyptic." The survey, which was
made public today, recommends an immediate end to the embargo on imports of food and other essential supplies to prevent "imminent
catastrophe."

The report, prepared by a United Nations team that visited the country between March 10 and March 17, says the bombing has relegated Iraq "to a
pre-industrial age" and warns that the nation could face "epidemic and famine if massive life-supporting needs are not rapidly met."

This warning was ignored by the new Nazis. America and its allies might just as well have sprayed the Iraqis with poison gas as Mussolini did the
Ethiopians in the 1930s.

In 1991, Paul Lewis wrote in the New York Times: "Ever since the trade embargo was imposed on Aug. 6, after the invasion of Kuwait, the United
States has argued against any premature relaxation in the belief that by making life uncomfortable for the Iraqi people it will eventually encourage
them to remove President Saddam Hussein from power."

This is a little bit like recommending starvation to a power lifter training for the Olympics. The thinking doesn't make any sense at all, but it
didn't have to. I think America, like the Nazis of the Third Reich, was simply experimenting with new ways to kill people.

I think what really tipped me off was when the US Army switched to the Nazi helmet.

We grew up playing war games and reading comics with US Army heroes like Sgt. Rock, who was always worried about being pounded by 88s and who would at
the last moment manage to toss a grenade into the open hatch of a Tiger tank and where the enemy wore a Nazi helmet and always shouted things
like "Hein!?!?!?" just before disappearing in a explosion.

The Nazi helmet was a symbol of the Nazis and to me it always spelled trouble, from the time I was a little boy.

Nazi helmet = Trouble

So when the US Army, my boyhood heroes, switched to the Nazi helmet, I was in shock. I said to myself, "Why is the US Army wearing the
Nazi helmet?"

And then I started to pay more attention to what they were doing. Does anyone know if Jews are still allowed in the US Army? If so are they all issued
the new helmet or do they have the option of choosing the US Army helmet instead? Just wondering.

Yes this has been one of my major concerns about UK BBC News reports for a number of months now, they tell you only anti Assad leaders enemy news, or
yes the UK backed terror groups who are anti Christian.
I have reason to think that the BBC once re-known for true news has been infiltrated by anti west staff, I rang the BBC a number of times to inform
them about pro British news items, a few mates rang BBC talking about pro British news, not a thing mentioned on news anywhere, they even put the
phone down on us.
Then we rang the BBC telling them about pro Muslim news, they were all over us, even though we were the same people who had rang hours early on that
same day.
One of my mates who use to work at the BBC left because they had turned so anti British he could not work with them.
I think today if the UK was under heavy attack the BBC would tell the people the war was lost even if it was not, they are so pro Terrorist
supporters.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.